This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

IMHO, everything, everyday is a form of contract. We have a contract to drive on our side and we bet our life that everyone will honor that contract. We contract our labor so you don't find out at the end of the week what your pay rate was. In fact, we're all experienced contractors and the only place we don't use those skills is in affairs of the heart.

People get married for the dumbest reasons. You were good in bed so you'll also be good at life? We dive into a veritable swamp of legal and structural repercussions on vague assumptions. The only people that have any chance of having a fulfilling long term arrangement are people who know what the damn deal is. Polygamy would force people to give a lot more thought to how they entangle themselves.

A better and happier world filled with rainbows and unicorns.

Originally Posted by sangha

I see we have much to agree on, and marriage being a contract is definitely one of them, regardless of how often some insist that it is a religious institution. I mean, if two (or more) people want to consider their union a religious institution, I don't really give a rats' patootie, but according to our system, it is undeniably a type of contract. However, I do admire the notion that people should be allowed to commit themselves to ech other, in any number.

And I agree that the issue here is legality and not the practicality, at least not practicality on the individual level. However, "practicality" (for lack of a better term) does come into play when talking about the basis of many laws. A good deal of contract law is justified by asking "Does it serve the publics' interest?" While there is definitely a public interest in allowing people to join in to a contract with their consent, it is not in the publics interest to set no limits on what sort of agreements can be enforced (contract to kill, prostitution, etc)

So I guess, my point here is that the whole issue is not simply one of "We should allow people the freedom to enter into contracts with their consent being the only consideration". IMO, if one were to closely consider these other issues (ex property division, child well being, societal order, etc), the whole topic becomes too complex and contentious to be manageable.

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

l would like to know your points of view on polygamic marriages which include more than two spouses .

It should remain banned, but I also don't see any point in marriage to one person, let alone multiple people.

I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

in my opinion no one who cares about love ,loyality or woman rights must approve this..

sorry i didnt ready any posts in the thread yet i just post my opinion.

As for your opinion i totally disagree

while, me or you may not want to have anything to do with polygamy that most certainly doesn't mean people in those relationships don't love each other and are not loyal.

ALso if its available for all, what does woman's rights have to do with it? what happens if a woman has multiple husbands? or if this happens after equal rights are granted for gays what about a multiple partner all girl relationship.

This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!Make America Great Again!Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

sorry i didnt ready any posts in the thread yet i just post my opinion.

As for your opinion i totally disagree

while, me or you may not want to have anything to do with polygamy that most certainly doesn't mean people in those relationships don't love each other and are not loyal.

ALso if its available for all, what does woman's rights have to do with it? what happens if a woman has multiple husbands? or if this happens after equal rights are granted for gays what about a multiple partner all girl relationship.

you cant be loyal when you have more than one spouse.

it is a well known fact that men usually tend to have polygamic desires...

and it (women having multiple husbands )sounds more disturbing than the other kind

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

If you can put together a multi-party relationship with all its complexities at 2 AM, you're a better man than I MacDuff.

I find my argument brilliant and elegantly put.

Originally Posted by maquiscat

For all that I am a supporter of poly marriages, I find this argument somewhat lacking. While yes, we in the poly community try to educate so that those entering into this lifestyle will create such contracts, what is there that would prevent a poly marriage from happening at 2 AM in Vegas the same way a mono marriage does?

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

Originally Posted by Ed Kociela

It is difficult to reconcile my very liberal philosophies to my revulsion at polygamy. The majority of polygamists are members of a fundamentalist Mormon cult that is based along the Utah-Arizona border (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.) Although I really have no interest in how consenting adults behave towards each other as long as they do no harm to others, I make an exception when polygamy enters the picture. As a longtime journalist who has written the book 'plygs,' I know only too well the dangers of polygamy. It is almost never a matter of consenting adults as little girls, some as young as 12, are forced into marriage with much older men as soon as they become fertile. Women are subjected to degradation as being merely the possessions of their husbands. Young boys are taken from school and forced to work in the fields or in the church-owned businesses for no pay. They adhere to the practice of what they call 'bleeding the beast,' which is an economic fraud perpetrated against the government to receive everything from health care benefits to food stamps. The sister wives have been trained to write 'father unknown' on the birth certificates of their newborns, which greases the tracks for their eligibility for public assistance. They have stockpiles of highi-powered weapons and explosives in caches hidden throughout the Utah-Arizona community of Short Creek (Hildale Utah and Colorado City, Arizona) for use against law enforcement in the event of a major raid on the community similar to the one in 1953 when Arizona cops went in and arrested everybody in town for violating polygamy laws.

This is a dangerous, violent, perverted society run by evil pedophiles. Their leader, self-proclaimed prophet Warren Jeffs, is in a Texas prison, serving two life-plus-20-year terms for sexual abuse of a child--his 12-year-old and 14-year-old brides, one of whom he impregnated. A dozen other men were also convicted along with Jeffs.

If this was simply a matter of sexual/relationship consent among adults, much like gay marriage, I would have no qualms, but there are few polygamous communities that leave it as such.

Polygamy is not as represented by the reality show 'Sister Wives' or 'Big Love.' It is an ugly, perverted culture based on fear and greed.

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

2.)it is a well known fact that men usually tend to have polygamic desires...

3.)and it (women having multiple husbands )sounds more disturbing than the other kind

1.) of course you can, polygamist view it as one unit, they are all part of the same team.

2.) true, i also not many many woman that would love to have more than one guy at a time too, its just usually thier standards are higher. THey would like to have a "the Rock" and "Vin diesel" sandwich while guys are fine with a neighbor girlfriend sandwich LOL

3.) again, we may think that but its not for us to decide.

This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!Make America Great Again!Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

re: polygamy ? [W: 267,434]

Originally Posted by Objective-J

1.) of course you can, polygamist view it as one unit, they are all part of the same team.

2.) true, i also not many many woman that would love to have more than one guy at a time too, its just usually thier standards are higher. THey would like to have a "the Rock" and "Vin diesel" sandwich while guys are fine with a neighbor girlfriend sandwich LOL